I don't recall saying exactly that. I don't accept the arguments of Humanae Vitae. I tell Catholics what I am supposed to tell them as a representative of the Church. But I don't defend Humanae Vitae or the Church's teaching on contraception, because I can't do it.
The Church says that couples may regulate the size of their families. That means that couples may purposely engage in sexual intercourse with the express intention and physical means to avoid conception.
The method (NFP or non-abortafacient contraception) is secondary.
Ah, but that is the entire difference, according to HV: "In the former the married couple rightly use a faculty provided them by nature. In the latter they obstruct the natural development of the generative process."
You may be interested in this article, which was posted here on FR before. It makes a pretty convincing case for a real distinction between NFP and non-abortifacient contraception. (Emphasis original:)
In other words, the Pope's condemnation applies exclusively to conjugal acts carried out during what the spouses understand to be the wife's fertile period, but which they deliberately pervert (whether by 'withdrawal', condoms, pills, or any other technique) so as to deprive them of that fertility.
Amazing how many Catholics leave out the qualifier "for serious resons"
But I don't defend Humanae Vitae or the Church's teaching on contraception, because I can't do it.
Why? Is your problem with children or natural law?
You read Humanae Vitae with the eye of a legalist but you can't defend it? That means you don't grasp its argument or you reject it. Which is it? I hope it is the former.
"I don't accept the arguments of Humanae Vitae. I tell Catholics what I am supposed to tell them as a representative of the Church. But I don't defend Humanae Vitae or the Church's teaching on contraception, because I can't do it."
HV itself does a perfectly good job.
This is false. The Church teaches that marital intercourse must always be open to the possibility of life. Apart from absolutely foreclosing any recourse to physical means, this means that even if there is a desire to avoid conception through licit means, this may not be the couple's specific goal.
Then you ought to resign.
Learn the Theology of the Body, start with West's "for Beginners" book, pick up the CDs at www.nakedwithoutshame.com, then move up to West's "explained" book then perhaps you can grasp the raw text of the Holy Father's audiences.
We need people who not only know it themselves but can teach it, because it is the cure for the culture of death. That's his legacy to us.
There is also a show running on EWTN that is going thru it. They haven't gotten very far so I can't really predict how well they are going to explain it.
If we could replace the contraceptive mentality that is being taught, even in parochial schools, with this beautiful teaching it would ignite a fire in the Church and in this society.
In our archdiocese we are trying to do just that, teaching parents and preparing catechists to go to the Catholic high schools
This is a bald-faced lie, you deceptive AmChurch "deacon." This is NOT Catholic teaching! This is apostacy!
The method (NFP or non-abortafacient contraception) is secondary.
This is proof of rank heresy.
Why don't you do your soul a favor and either cease and desist claiming to be a Catholic deacon or cease and desist in your open public persistent dissent? Does your diocese know you publicly advocate such rank heresy?